fixpafandomcom-20200216-history
News: State court rejects lawsuit over perks for PA legislators in 2006
(Note: as if we needed any more reasons to vote NO on judges in 2007.) : Source: Tuesday, November 14, 2006, By Tracie Mauriello, Post-Gazette Harrisburg Bureau HARRISBURG -- State legislators' car leases, health insurance, and per diems are not forbidden by the Pennsylvania constitution, a six- judge panel. Harrisburg activist Gene Stilp, who filed the Commonwealth Court suit in February, 2006, based his claim on a section of the constitution providing for legislators to receive "salary and mileage for regular and special sessions as shall be fixed by law, and no other compensation whatever" and prohibiting mid-term raises. Judge Robert Simpson Jr., writing for the majority, suggested Mr. Stilp is interpreting the section too literally. The state Supreme Court has consistently interpreted the section to "prohibit only 'salary' and 'mileage' increases during a legislative term," Judge Simpson wrote. "Although language in the constitutional provision could support a conclusion that state legislators should not receive anything of value beyond 'salary and mileage,' that construction was repeatedly declined by the Supreme Court and ... has not been the law in this commonwealth for the last 125 years." Mr. Stilp, though, says the constitution is clear. "It's plain to any third-grader. It says, legislators shall receive 'salary and mileage ... and no other compensation whatever,'" he said after yesterday's decision, which he plans to appeal. "That's the contract between the legislators and the citizens of Pennsylvania. It says salary and mileage and nothing else, but legislators try to fit all these other things into it." He argued in his suit that lawmakers are not entitled to other benefits such as the $141 they collect for every day spent in Harrisburg in addition to their salaries. The court disagreed. Meanwhile, the court declined to rule on two aspects of the case dealing with leadership accounts and so-called "walking-around money" but left open the possibility for Mr. Stilp to ask for reconsideration. The court said Mr. Stilp did not provide enough information on funds in legislative leadership accounts, which he says have been improperly accumulating instead of being returned to the general fund at the end of each year. Mr. Stilp also objects to the use of "walking-around money," also known as WAMs, or grants legislative leaders give to rank-and-file to distribute at will to community organizations and causes in their district. Mr. Stilp says WAMs constitute legislative perks because members benefit through publicity and good will that helps their re- election campaigns. Steve McNett, chief counsel for the Senate Republican caucus, said there has been no abuse of leadership accounts or WAMs. "We will promptly make another filing, which will make it clear to the court that these provisions are thoroughly constitutionally and in accord with the law," he said. Mr. McNett expects legislators to win on that point, too. "This was a suit where Mr. Stilp threw in all the various items he had complaints about, everything but the kitchen sink," Mr. McNett said. "This is just another piece of frivolous litigation brought by Gene Stilp." In the past two years Mr. Stilp has filed three suits against the Legislature and its leaders. Links * Perks category:news coverage